| From: | Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> |
|---|---|
| To: | Frédéric Yhuel <frederic(dot)yhuel(at)dalibo(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: REINDEX blocks virtually any queries but some prepared queries. |
| Date: | 2022-04-07 15:29:36 |
| Message-ID: | CAECtzeWffJaqEEyEoSf5K4SToPx8bJVDhYLdK1m5uzgasQDy6w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Le jeu. 7 avr. 2022 à 15:44, Frédéric Yhuel <frederic(dot)yhuel(at)dalibo(dot)com> a
écrit :
>
>
> On 4/7/22 14:40, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 07, 2022 at 01:37:57PM +0200, Frédéric Yhuel wrote:
> >> Maybe something along this line? (patch attached)
> > Some language fixes.
>
> Thank you Justin! I applied your fixes in the v2 patch (attached).
>
>
v2 patch sounds good.
> > I didn't verify the behavior, but +1 to document the practical
> consequences.
> > I guess this is why someone invented REINDEX CONCURRENTLY.
> >
>
> Indeed ;) That being said, REINDEX CONCURRENTLY could give you an
> invalid index, so sometimes you may be tempted to go for a simpler
> REINDEX, especially if you believe that the SELECTs won't be blocked.
Agreed.
--
Guillaume.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2022-04-07 15:37:15 | Re: why pg_walfile_name() cannot be executed during recovery? |
| Previous Message | Justin Pryzby | 2022-04-07 15:24:49 | Re: How about a psql backslash command to show GUCs? |